Most members of Congress have little direct military experience

Only about a fifth of the members of Congress who are debating whether or not to authorize U.S. military action in Syria have any military experience themselves.

On Wednesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 10-7 to approve a resolution giving President Obama limited authority to attack Syria in response to its government’s reported use of chemical weapons against civilians. Public opinion, however, is leaning against airstrikes against Syria, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

Twenty senators (20%) and 89 representatives (20.5%) are veterans, according to the authoritative Vital Statistics on Congress, published by The Brookings Institution. Among the Senate’s notable veterans: Republicans John McCain (Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.), both strong supporters of taking action against Syria; Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin and Kansas Republican Pat Roberts, both of whom have expressed skepticism or outright opposition; and Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey, who voted “present” on the Syria resolution Wednesday.

Not all that long ago, military service was practically a requirement for serving in Congress. The high point in recent decades was the 95th Congress (1977-78) when, following an influx of Vietnam-era veterans, a combined 77% of the House and Senate had served in the armed forces. But as World War II veterans have retired and relatively few Americans enlist in the all-volunteer armed forces, veterans account for a smaller and smaller share of Congress.

That reflects the wider trend in U.S. society. According to Census figures, veterans currently make up about 7% of the overall population, down from 13.7% in 1970 — when the Vietnam War was raging and the draft was still in place. As a 2011 Pew Research Center report noted, the post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been fought by a historically small U.S. military; this has contributed to a distance between the military and civilian society. While Americans overwhelmingly say they feel proud of those who’ve served and appreciate their sacrifices, 71% say most Americans know little or nothing about the problems faced by military personnel; about as many (74%) oppose reinstating a draft.

21 Comments

There are more aspects of having a draft than can be counted.
One aspect I would like others to consider is the societal attitudes and values that make a draft possible. Without those attitudes and values were are in trouble.

The draft reflects a societal attitude of cooperation and mutual sense of responsibilities. When the draft died in 1973 it was the result of our national change in attitude that we were no longer all in this together. In theory the draft was classless. We were all considered mutually responsible for the defense of out country. Even Elvis was drafted.

Without the values and attitudes behind the draft and the assumption that we are all in this together comes the assumption that not all of us have a responsibility to do our share in regard to the welfare of others. That not all of us are responsible to others to the point we need to disrupt our lives and risk our lives and our futures for everybody else; that a cooperative spirit is not of value. It’s the cooperative spirit that used to give great strength to this society. Without the cooperative spirit little of societal substance or progress gets done.

One last point: I’m guessing that if a primary question our legislators has to answer yes to, before voting to go to war, was Are you going to war yourself, or sending your loved ones?, we wouldn’t have gone to war in Iraq in the first place.
More important than anything else, we need to redevelop as sense of mutual responsibility and cooperation; which would ultimately result in a draft.

From a practical perspective, without personal military experience our legislators don’t understand how the military works, it’s problems, or it’s capabilities. They sure don’t understand the consequences related to military service. The don’t “know the score.”

During the Vietnam War one aspect of the draft that I’ve never heard discussed was that it moderated our military. Because of the draft, the majority of the militaries’ members were not dependent on forging a career in the military, not dependent upon it to add to their status, not worried about staying in in order to retire from it, or in need of rationalizing its flaws. Many more members of the military of the time were in it with civilian values. They were less about winning and more about doing what was right; which has been a traditional American value.

The draft is far more the result of intangibles than tangibles. We need to get back to valuing those intangibles

I Don’t support reinstating the draft. As a 1968 draftee, who did not support the Vietnam war, I felt like an American without the freedom to voice my opinion. At the age of 18, I was definitely not mentally ready to depart from my family and face an enemy I didn’t know. I was not ready to be placed in a war zone to kill or be kill. I fought the draft for five years and when the second draft notice came in the mail, although afraid of what was planned for me, I was more mature and accepted my American responsibility. Today, I am proud of having served my country honorably and respectfully. I am proud of being a veteran.

My experience taught me that the draft is not what we need, and the all volunteer army is not the answer. What we should consider is incorporating military service with our higher education. Just as sports can be a major part of our education system, so can military service. The following is a possible breakdown of the educational program:

Part One: Elementary School Kindergarten – 5th grade (6 years not military)
Part Two: Middle School 6th – 8th grade (3 years not military)
Part Three: High School 9th -12th grade (4 years not military)

NEW
Part Four should give each student one year of college credits accepted in any college and all veteran’s benefits.
Part Four: Military Ed. Basic Training (2months)
Job/MOS Training (4months)
Military Service (1 year)
If you agree, send it to President Obama.

The U.S. is one of only just a few Industrialized nations that doesn’t require military service. The folks that are against instituting mandatory service have never served and probably doesn’t have a family member servicing. You can never know the sacrifices of military families if you’ve never served.

Trust me, enlisted men and women aren’t getting a free ride. Politicians talk a good game because their sons and daughters aren’t serving. I’m 100% sure if one of Mitt Romey’s five sons was serving, he wouldn’t be so hell bent on going into Iran, North Korea and where ever else his so called military dodgeing adviser recommend.

American are quick to support military but aren’t quick to serve or have their son and daughters serve. That’s the disconnect. If you haven’t served or willing to serve, your opinion doesn’t matter.

No, the active military does not want the draft. You may find a few that do, but no one in the military that has a clue would. Drafts create HUGE discipline problems, degrade readiness through having short term members who are no with a unit long enough to be useful but take spots away from those who will be, consume resources that are scarce as it is (repair part cost increase as poorly experienced and poorly disciplined troops break more things, fuel costs to increase total number of vehicles and movement, barracks spacing – after the countless BRACS the military infrastructure within the country is EXTREMELY low and taxed just supporting the structure we have now, and so on), and cause more casualties in wars. The professionalism and skill of todays military FAR exceeds what has ever been seen in this country or the world really. Adding a draft will wreck the ability of the current military to conduct its missions where small wars all over the globe require disciplined professional forces.

Mr. Lovejoy a couple of comments on your logic. Vietnam was a war fought by draftees, it was not a short war, by any stretch of the immagination, in fact it lasted from December 1956 to the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975. this was just short of 20 years. It was the longest war in our history, aside from the American Indian wars which lasted from 1622–1924 (intermittently). So when you say that wars will be shorter, I am not clear how you correlate the length of a war with either the all volunteer military or a drafted military? Statistics show you have no idea what you are talking about. Along these same lines, you believe if we had a drafted military we would not end up in places like Afganistan or Iraq? I guess my question would be how was Vietnam much more significant to US interests? After loosing that war, I did not note any world collapse or any significant change in anything? Another significant fact, comparing the losses of 55 thousand Americans in Vietnam to 4.5 thousand in Iraq and 2322 in Afghanistan. While both of these wars were just under 10 years, they are no where near the casualties of Vietnam. There are many ways one can interpret these numbers, but the bottom line, the all volunteer military is one of the most effective military machines. I joined the service shortly after vietnam, Greneda, Panama, Desert Storm, Somolia, Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq have all been successful interventions of some type, executed by an all volunteer force, understanding that training and funding have been key to those successes. How do I measure success, we did not loose and we did not exfil out. Just my 2 cents.

Correction: I seem to have left a key piece out of my first sentence. I meant to say that if the United States reinstituted the draft, there would be fewer instances of the United States being involved in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. And if we were, with the draft, the wars would certainly be much shorter.

I would be willing to bet you that there would be fewer instances of United States involvement in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan. I would further bet there would be no talk at all about military involvement in places like Syria if there was a universal draft in the United States. Reinstitute the draft and every draft age man and woman had to serve at least two (2) years. If you are a conscientious objector, then you serve your two years in the Peace Corps or some other humanitarian, non-combat position. I spent two years in Vietnam and while there an uncle who served in the Army Combat Engineers and participated in most of the campaigns in Italy wrote and told me that “in World War II when the military took a piece of land, they held onto it”. Vietnam seemed to reflect a change in philosophy ie. Hamburger Hill in North Vietnam. How many times were US troops asked to take that hill? How many times was that hill abandoned? How many lives were lost each time we had to retake that hill? What a moronic and senseless philosophy? Gotta love the politics. And now, you have a bunch of ideologues in Congress who have never been in the military sending our troops into places like Iraq and Afghanistan for 3–4–or 5 tours of duty which creates untold physical and mental damage to the soldier and their families. And then on top of that, these morons reduce benefits and funding for the benefits and medical services needed for these veterans. The sad part is, the collective ‘we’ keep reelecting these idiots!!! But then again, there is an increasingly higher percentage of the ‘collective we’ who never served in the military and have no clue what sacrafices are demanded of the men and women in uniform and how the physical and psychological damage to the veteran impacts the family.

any one running for any political office should have had to serve in the military, should have to live on social security for at least a year and given nothening else, if they dictate to us on what we have to live on then they need to know what it is like, do as we do and live how we have to live, I don’t understand why they have no rules, we have rules they give us but they have never had to live like us, poverty is so sad , so live it for a while. see how your children feel.

Here’s the bottom line. There are a lot of voices calling for the President to put American soliders in harms by sending them back to war after fighting a war for over 11 years. It’s easy to suggest putting boots on the ground when ou are not the one who has to leave their family and face the possbility of not returning home. If you have never been through it; I can tell you from personal accounts. One of many reason affects the livelyhood and Physiological outcome of a solider and or miltrary spouse and children. So don’t be so fast to push our young men and women into battle. Remember they have to come home and live out the rest of their lives with the wounds of war.

THANK YOU Congress for back stabbing the military family who gave up so much to defend this country. I just asked you CONGRESS to re-think all the budget cuts that will be coming in the near future; First and foremost look into your own budget and retire plans. START THERE! Not the military pay or benefits. It seems like an easy solution to always take away from the military. For the 20% of Senators and 20.5% of Representatives who are veterans, you should ashamed of yourselves!

you are so right, my husband had 24 years air force, died 8 years after retireing with a rare cancer, he taught chemical warfare, and also painted all the military trucks and equipment out side with out any protective gear, shorts a a tshirt, he came home with paint up his nose and in his ears, toxic paint, I have pictures of him doing it. they had no paint booth there, I have a letter thanking him for doing that. when I contacted the military about his cancer there responce was I could not prove it.he died a horrible death, then they give you 55% of his retirement, they have no Ideal what his family suffered, and don’t care.

I agree wholeheartedly with commenter Edward Evanko. Our constantly being at war (Iraq, Afghanistan) is destroying our economy. These wars are unnecessary and unwinnable. I served in Viet Nam (an unnecessary, unwinnable war) and oppose our involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and any potential conflict in Syria. Our young men and women in the military are dying or coming back physically and mentally maimed for no good reason. Politicians full of bluster spout nonsense about American exceptionalism and challenge anyone who opposes war as unpatriotic, yet few of them served or would have their children serve in the military.
The cost of these wars will go on well after they end, if they ever end. Money that could be spent on improving the lives of Americans such as rebuilding our infrastructure and putting people back to work is instead spent on the war machine. It is no wonder our recovery from the recession has been so slow when our priorities have been so skewed.

Our economy is going down hill, Government plans on reducing benefits for seniors, also planning to reduce insurance on 171,000 military retirees, we have millions without insurance, our government took our young military to war against Iraq by lying whereby thousands of civilians were killed and many of our own military died or maimed. Yet, we have politicians in Wash who are in favor of war and to me,
they are warmongers. Our government violates International law, our Constitution and attacks countries that haven’t attacked America!. Our politicians are doing everything to insure safety of a mid-eastern
country by giving millions of dollars and this is ridiculous while we are reducing food stamps and other
products to the needy people in America!

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts.